EMI sues VideoEgg
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- “It should be unstated by now that websites and media groups will never be free of torment from record labels and music protection groups,” says Triston McIntyre on Profy, going on:
“In fact, I hardly give a moment’s notice to ‘news’ about some website or college student coming under prosecution from the RIAA or one of its many cronies.
“I am, however, keenly interested when a social network or media site comes under fire for user-created content. Today I read that popular social network Hi5 is being sued by large music group EMI for alledgedly allowing users to upload video content with embedded copyrighted music. I’m all ears.
“Hi5, though not hugely popular in the U.S, does have a large user base abroad. Hi5, like many social networking sites, somewhat recently opened its platform so developers could create user applications. One such application from VideoEgg allows users to upload their own video creations, which includes videos with music clips playing as background tracks. That isn’t anything particularly new, but it certainly makes for some fun internet time-wasting.”
VideoEgg?
Yup.
As Ray Beckerman points out on Recording Industry vs The People, “A new copyright infringement case has been commenced in New York, by the record companies, against Video Egg. The name of the case is Capitol v. Video Egg, and the docket number is 08-5831, in the Southern District of New York.”
A slew of plaintiffs, all of them EMI affiliates, are claiming “massive and blatant infringement of their copyrighted works by a ’social networking’ website, Hi5, and by the entity that enables such infringement to take place by copying, adapting, publicly performing and distributing videos that have been uploaded, view, and disseminated by users of Hi5″.
VideoEgg says it’s a, “pioneering video ad network for online communities” which connects brands to consumers, “with video and rich media across a network of more than 200 leading video and gaming sites, social networks and applications”.
“We are helping redefine the world of online advertising,” it states.
But, “EMI alleges that the companies turn a blind eye to piracy by allowing people to upload unlicensed clips from groups like Coldplay and Black Eyed Peas,” says Online Media Daily, going on:
“The lawsuit also alleges that VideoEgg directly profits from the clips by attaching video ads to them.”
“While each of the defendants has the right, ability and legal obligation to prevent infringement of plaintiffs’ copyrighted works, they have allowed infringement to go unchecked, content to profit handsomely from advertisements that appear side-by-side with infringing content,” says the lawsuit.
EMI also says VideoEgg is failing to proactively filter copyrighted material, which is extremely interesting considering VideoEgg, “has said it relies on technology from Audible Magic to block infringing content,” says Online Media Daily.
Audio Magic is cited by the RIAA as the be-all and end-all in filtering technology and which may, or may not, have cost RIAA-compliant Ohio University (or should it be US taxpayers?) a cool $75,000.
EMI says it’s looking for $150,000 in damages for each infringement.
We didn’t count them, but there’s a pile.
Adds Triston >>>
It seems obvious to me that the old rules of copyright will have to change, and change quickly. EMI, the RIAA and others will never stop crying about the “rights of the artists,” artists who even believe that such media protection groups are a little off their rockers, not to mention acting with very little interest for the actual artists, and users will certainly not stop violating copyright laws to create their own content. We are at a stalemate, and it would be sad to see the government side with a few money-grubbing companies instead of promoting the advancement of the internet and social venues.
After all, what do music protection groups really contribute? Certainly not as much as social communites have given. Some artists have completely dropped the idea of signing with big record labels, because those companies are only focused on squeezing the life source out of artists and then dropping them on the curb. That can’t be something the government is willing to defend.
But who knows? I don’t. For the time being, social communities and websites will have to step carefully to avoid the murky waters of copyright infringement, waters that the music business sharks patrol hungrily. To those of you who might dabble in audio overlays of your video content, think twice before uploading, lest you receive an unwelcome visit from some kook with an RIAA or EMI nametag.
Stay tuned.
.
.Stumble It!
Profy – Hi5 Catches Flak from EMI, June 30, 2008
Recording Industry vs The People – RIAA sues Video Egg in New York City, July 2, 2008
Online Media Daily – EMI Sues VideoEgg, Hi5 Over User Video Uploads, June 30, 2008
cool $75,000 – Ohio University buys RIAA ’silver bullet’, February 28, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
July 2nd, 2008 at 11:16 am
EMI says it’s looking for $Brazillion in damages for each infringement, since we can’t make nearly that much actually selling stuff….
July 2nd, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Screw those bastards at EMI. Those stupid fuckers are never going to stop, but guess what EMI. WE ARE NOT GOING TO STOP. There is nothing they can do to overpower the internet. Over the last 20 years it has been demonstrated TIME AND TIME again that they’re tactics are useless. The sue ‘em all campaign has been a complete and total fucking failure. Anything they do will be a complete fucking failure. THEY are a complete fucking failure. Go straight to hell you anti-capitalist bastards at the RIAA. To my Canadian friends, do everything you can to throw this shit back into the faces of these companies. ESPECIALLY the one that claims to be American (Warner).
July 2nd, 2008 at 2:40 pm
@Mostly harmless: Woah! Only 1 Brazilian dollar (BRL)? That’s like, at the current exchange rate, only 0.62 USD!
July 3rd, 2008 at 6:32 am
they dont need to sell products when theres an endless supply of extortion victims and authorities in bed with them for tax dollars and bribes
July 4th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
and EMI’s lawyer branch in specific seems to have indoctrinated that reality perfectly.
maybe it’s because despite their nice company claim they have in german “EMI – gute musik ist besser” they realised that they are fu nned up (remember the 2006 headquarter-teenager incident?!) and nobody want the artists they have under contract any more so they really figured suing “god and the world” for statutory damages is more profitable!
The “flowers” accounting does not work anymore with the new owner so maybe the lawyer branch is fearing if they don’t show some great (but for outsiders with clear brain obviously insane) engagement in doing their job, that the new boss the terra firma guy will fire them for being a useless cost factor in his investment?
maybe those EMI lawyers are running amok and sue “god and the world” just so they can “put food on their family” and don’t get their jobs rationalised by this new boss?
maybe we should initiate a “help EMI-Lawyers”-support fund if that will help stop them in hurting the progress of internet evolution.
In the alternative we could of course do with them that blackwater is doing with insurgence(sp?) in iraq, could’nt we?
Hint: votefromrooftop.jpg
October 18th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Yes, really they can’t control internet, from behind of it all their ridiculous judicial claims.